Much has been said about Hillary Clinton’s support for the overthrow of Muammar Gaddafi in Libya. Some say she supported the action because she is “hawkish.” But why overthrow a leader who’d started to cooperate with Europe and the United States? On the surface, the policy didn’t make sense. Closer scrutiny suggests the reason had little to do with Hillary Clinton’s state of mind. (Blog 3/19/2016) According to Horace Campbell, a professor of African-American Studies and Political Science at Syracuse University, the dictator died, in part, to protect the American dollar.

And in the case of Libya, the legitimacy of the leader had come from his presenting himself as someone who was part of the African Union and wanted to build an African Monetary Fund, an African Central Bank, and a African common currency. And that was a danger to not only the euro, because Sarkozy said, we’re going to fight to save the euro, but it would present a threat to the dollar. (Click)

Other countries, like Russia and China, have been equally eager to replace US currency as the vehicle for international trade, but Khadafy’s threat seemed imminent.

By way of background, the dollar emerged as the world’s currency after World War II. At the time, our government controlled nearly all the world’s hard currency. Being the largest global economy and “the only currency that could command sufficient trust as a global reserve asset,” the dollar gained dominance in international finance. (“America and the Global Economy,” by Jacob J. Lew, U. S. Secretary of the Treasury, Foreign Affairs, May/June 2016, pg. 60.) Today, the picture has become more balanced, but faith in the soundness of the dollar persists. That dominance gave our country leverage to impose sanctions on Iran, eventually leading to a nuclear treaty with them. It also gave us the clout to mobilize the world to combat the Ebola epidemic in 2014 and to create the international Green Climate Fund to save the environment.

When the financial crisis of 2008 hit the nation, the world waited to be engulfed by a fiscal tsunami. It never came because the US government stepped in to protect the dollar and our financial institutions. Much of the American public hated the decision, but that action prevented a worldwide depression.

We live in a complex world. Good derives from bad; bad for good. We were right to overthrow Gaddafi? I don’t know. What I do know is that Hillary Clinton’s perceived hawkishness had little to do with the tyrant’s fate.

The entire Joint Chiefs of Staff argued mightily against the invasion stating that it would destabilize Libya and create another home for extremists... Clinton insisted on the invasion. Subsequent events proved the Joint Chiefs right. And there is her famous email "we came, we saw, he's dead." This is after being informed he was killed by having a sword shoved up his anus. We also have the problem of her recent talk before the pro-Israel lobby group where she promised to act more "muscular" in the middle east than Obama. Finally, who benefits from the dollar lording it over the world? Wall Street.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Transitional_Council
Above is an account of the Libyan invasion from a perspective sufficiently left-wing to qualify as "no friend of the administration.' The record of the invasion is confused, as you will see. Initially the U.S. attempted to quell the uprising by NTC. Then it sent CIA etc. There are several accounts of Qaddafi's death. None refer to a sword being driven up his anus, though it is possible. As the dictator was in the hands of rebels and not the United States, I doubt either Obama or Hillary can be blamed for that excess, if it occurred. I can find no record of the Joint Chief issuing a statement of opposition to the president. I could find no statements to that effect in Leon Penetta's testimony before the Congress which I have read. If you have a reliable source, please share it. As to the dollar lording it over the world, I shared the article precisely because it does not show us in our finest hour. If we have offenses to account for let us face them and give an accounting. But we make no progress as a nation when we choose to make scapegoats of individuals without a fair and full picture. You may not like Hillary but she did not violate Qaddafi's body. She did not create the NTC. And the invasion, for whatever reason, took place on Obama's watch, not Hillary's. How she will perform under her own aegis is yet to be seen.

Thank you for the link. Unfortunately nothing comes up. Noticed the source was Washington Times an ultra conservative and very anti Clinton publication, akin to Fox news. There may be a reason why this source is no longer available. There is nothing and I mean nothing on either Joint Chief of Staff site, the Pentagon site or in the the Congressional testimony by Leon Panetta that I could find to support the presumed quarrel between Hillary and the military. Though a quarrel between Hillary and the Pentagon isn't damning in my eyes, in the interest of clarity I am open to another source if you have one.

Caroline published a serialized novelette, Marie Eau-Claire, on the website, The Colored Lens. She also published the story Gustav Pavel, a parable about ordinary lives, choice and alternate potential, on the website Fixional.co.